Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TPU] XFX Readies a Liquid-cooled Radeon R9 Fury
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TPU] XFX Readies a Liquid-cooled Radeon R9 Fury - Page 3

post #21 of 53
I still find it funny how Nvidia "fans" comment in AMD threads, and AMD "fans" comment in Nvidia threads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klocek001 View Post

nvidia charges more for more performance. amd charges for shorter cards.

Your sentence doesn't make any sense.

nvidia charges morefor more performance
Nvidia charges more money, which gets you a bit more performance.

amd charges for shorter cards
AMD charges a "normal" / "decent" price and, as an extra, it's a short card.

At least that's what I'm getting from your comment.
My PC
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 5820k MSI X99S Plus SLI Sapphire R9 Fury NITRO Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung SM951 512GB Seagate Barracuda 500GB Noctua NH-U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit Asus MG279Q Logitech G510 Corsair RM750 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian 700D Logitech G700 Outplay Sennheiser HD598 
Audio
Tritton PC510HDA (Microphone use only) 
  hide details  
Reply
My PC
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 5820k MSI X99S Plus SLI Sapphire R9 Fury NITRO Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung SM951 512GB Seagate Barracuda 500GB Noctua NH-U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit Asus MG279Q Logitech G510 Corsair RM750 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian 700D Logitech G700 Outplay Sennheiser HD598 
Audio
Tritton PC510HDA (Microphone use only) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #22 of 53
there is no way that this card should be anywhere near the Fury X price.

it'd be dead in the water if it were.
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
Sons Rig
(11 items)
 
File Server
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Ryzen 1700x ASUS Prime X370 Pro Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
16gb's Team Select 3200Mhz RGB  Crucial M500 SSD 240gb Corsair H55 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorMonitorPowerCase
ASUS PB287Q 4K Monitor HTC Vive Coolermaster Silent Pro M 1000W Rosewill Blackhawk Ultra 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Deathadder 2013 Steelseries Qck Mass Super Thick Cloth Mouse Pad Genius SW-G2.1 1250 4PC Gaming Speakers 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Core i7 3770k Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Galaxy Geforce GTX 780 Galaxy Geforce GTX 780 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
16 Gb's G.Skill DDR3 1866 Crucial M500 SSD 240Gb Coolit ECO C240 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorPowerCase
Benq G2420HD Coolermaster Silent Pro 1000 Watt Deepcool Kendomen 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i3 2120 Supermicro X9SCM-F 4 Gb Kingston 1600mhz DDR3 ECC 12 Segate 2tb drives (RAID 6) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSPower
ADATA SP600 SSD 24 Toshiba DT01ACA200 drives (2 RAID 6's) Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit. OCZ ZT750 Supermicro PWS-665-PQ 
CaseOtherOtherOther
Norco 4020 and Norco 4224 LSI 9260-4i Raid Card Intel RES2SV240 20 port Expander. HP SAS 24 por... Voltaire 410Ex Hca Infiniband HBA 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(15 items)
 
Sons Rig
(11 items)
 
File Server
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Ryzen 1700x ASUS Prime X370 Pro Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
16gb's Team Select 3200Mhz RGB  Crucial M500 SSD 240gb Corsair H55 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorMonitorPowerCase
ASUS PB287Q 4K Monitor HTC Vive Coolermaster Silent Pro M 1000W Rosewill Blackhawk Ultra 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Deathadder 2013 Steelseries Qck Mass Super Thick Cloth Mouse Pad Genius SW-G2.1 1250 4PC Gaming Speakers 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Core i7 3770k Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Galaxy Geforce GTX 780 Galaxy Geforce GTX 780 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
16 Gb's G.Skill DDR3 1866 Crucial M500 SSD 240Gb Coolit ECO C240 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorPowerCase
Benq G2420HD Coolermaster Silent Pro 1000 Watt Deepcool Kendomen 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Core i3 2120 Supermicro X9SCM-F 4 Gb Kingston 1600mhz DDR3 ECC 12 Segate 2tb drives (RAID 6) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSPower
ADATA SP600 SSD 24 Toshiba DT01ACA200 drives (2 RAID 6's) Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit. OCZ ZT750 Supermicro PWS-665-PQ 
CaseOtherOtherOther
Norco 4020 and Norco 4224 LSI 9260-4i Raid Card Intel RES2SV240 20 port Expander. HP SAS 24 por... Voltaire 410Ex Hca Infiniband HBA 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleazybigfoot View Post

the way I see it AMD charges more for shorter cards, Fury X -> 650 USD, Nano -> shorter for the same price and less performance. So what is the catch in paying 650 for a worse performing card ? the length.
Fury X=650.
Nano=650.
Fury X is 100%.
Nano is 90%.
10% missing in peformance is x
Fury X is Y cm long.
Nano is Y - z cm long.
x=z
Sorry if I made it unclear the 1st time.
Edited by Klocek001 - 9/21/15 at 12:02pm
post #24 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedyVT View Post

You must be confused. DX11 it is beating by 30-40%, however in DX12(Ashes) R9 390x has a 10% advantage over the 980 ti stock. The Fury needs newer drivers or something since it's only about the same as the 390x in benchmark so far. The DX12 benchmark for Unreal 4 is about a 5% difference between it's DX11, but the R9 390X is scoring significantly higher so my belief is to throw that out until we can get it's benchmark ultimately verified and fixed.

DX12 adoption is more than likely going to happen sooner than later. It's quite a huge paradigm compared to the previous and something like this will force adoption rather quick.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedyVT View Post

I read what Oxide states nothing more. If Maxwell is having issues there is nothing we can do but wait to see what nVidia provides. I'm not on any side, it's just fact that several benchmarks performed give the advantage to AMD in DX12. Even the DX11/DX12 benchmark for Unreal Engine 4 gives it to AMD surprisingly. However that benchmark's weight isn't entirely known or trusted yet.

This stopped being the case since the last set of drivers from Nvidia. Basically everything is even again with a gtx 980 being the same speed as a 390x and the gtx 980 ti likely being the fastest.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,26.html



http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-nano,4285-8.html






http://www.hardwareluxx.com/index.php/reviews/hardware/vgacards/36513-reviewed-amd-radeon-r9-nano-4gb.html?start=20



If this is the benchmark your making your dx12 claims on, it simply isn't true anymore.
post #25 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

You can't use logic when talking about the non-Fury X cards and prices this time around. That goes for a water cooled Fury or a Nano (water cooled or stock).

Yeah. There is no way in hell there is room for a AIO Fury out there. Unless XFX want to take some cut of the profit and launch it for $550 like all the Fury cards cost. Anything else makes it uninteresting
post #26 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post


This stopped being the case since the last set of drivers from Nvidia. Basically everything is even again with a gtx 980 being the same speed as a 390x and the gtx 980 ti likely being the fastest.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_nano_review,26.html



http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-nano,4285-8.html






http://www.hardwareluxx.com/index.php/reviews/hardware/vgacards/36513-reviewed-amd-radeon-r9-nano-4gb.html?start=20



If this is the benchmark your making your dx12 claims on, it simply isn't true anymore.

I've not been reading any of the updates if those benches remain valid for a while. Still a pitty to drop all that money on a 980 and the 290 is just as good even when it's that much older 390/290 same pretty much.
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
Reply
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogon View Post

Remember AMD's motto: Just wait™

Is that like the Nano motto? Performance Per Inch. For when you can't really do anything else well, make up a new metric.™

biggrin.gif
post #28 of 53
Frankly let's just drop the subject of aots once and for all. I wouldn't care if sb told me that 960 beats Fury or 7870 beats 980 in aots now. Just stop it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

Is that like the Nano motto? Performance Per Inch. For when you can't really do anything else well, make up a new metric.™

biggrin.gif
why would AMD fans pay for air I'll never know. But on the other hand I can't understand people buying Tita X's after 980ti launch, so maybe there's just something simple I don't get. Maybe they do because they can.
Edited by Klocek001 - 9/21/15 at 12:26pm
post #29 of 53
Are we still stuck on Fiji performance still? I think ya'll need to move on...

DX11 Games:
Non-reference 980Ti>Reference 980Ti>Fury X>Non-reference 980=Fury Pro>/=Fury Nano>980>/=390X>390=970

DX12 Games:
None are out right now.

Anyway, this might be the first good card XFX has released, as all others have had problems in one way or another (typically high temps compared to the competition and poorly cooled VRMs). If it uses the AIO unit from the Fury X, then there is little that XFX could screw up on this card.
post #30 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by airisom2 View Post

Are we still stuck on Fiji performance still? I think ya'll need to move on...

DX11 Games:
Non-reference 980Ti>Reference 980Ti>Fury X>Non-reference 980=Fury Pro>/=Fury Nano>980>/=390X>390=970

DX12 Games:
None are out right now.

Anyway, this might be the first good card XFX has released, as all others have had problems in one way or another (typically high temps compared to the competition and poorly cooled VRMs). If it uses the AIO unit from the Fury X, then there is little that XFX could screw up on this card.

Would you get one for $600 or $650? Why not a Fury X instead?
Or a 980Ti for almost 20% faster performance in 1440p?
Edited by iLeakStuff - 9/21/15 at 12:35pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TPU] XFX Readies a Liquid-cooled Radeon R9 Fury